Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
Thread started 26 Feb 2012 (Sunday) 17:34
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Canon 17-55 2.8 IS or 135 L

 
Raymate
Goldmember
1,688 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 2
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Toronto. CA - Bedford. UK
     
Feb 26, 2012 17:34 |  #1

Time for a new lens, I want to have both at some point but which one would you go for?

I can't buy both right now.

Not going to full frame yet. But in the next year so so I would like to get a 5D II, but I would keep my 50D (and maybe the 40D)

So going for the Canon 17-55 2.8 IS is not a waste in the long term.

I have an old 17-50 Sigma 2.8 and I assume the canon is another world... (I hope so anyway) I don't use this lens much as I fell it's not that good after using my other lenses.


Canon: EOS 5DmkII • 50D • 40D • 350D • 100 f2.8L IS Macro • 70-200 f4L • 24-105 f4L IS • 17-40 f4L • 50 f1.4 • 60 f2.8 Macro • 85 f1.8 • 430EX • 580EX II • ST-E2
Sigma: 10-20 f4-5.6 EX DC HSM • 30 f1.4 EX DC HSM • 17-50 f2.8 EX • 24-70 f2.8 EX DG MACRO
Apple: CS3, Aperture & iPhoto. Various Manfrotto, Portaflash, Battery Grips, SanDisk & Lowepro

alamy: my stock photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
y2k_o__o
Member
38 posts
Joined May 2011
     
Feb 26, 2012 18:32 |  #2

17-55mm and 135mm are two different lenses

17-55mm are general purpose lens on crop sensor bodies, if you are going to upgrade to 5D2 in the next year, you might as well save up for a 24-70mm f/2.8L

for 135mm, it might be too long on a crop sensor body. a 85mm f/1.8 will get you nearly the same VOF versus 135mm on full frame sensor body


Canon EOS 5D Classic
24-70mm f/2.8L, 70-200mm f/4L, 50mm f/1.8, 430EX II

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
Goldmember
Avatar
4,419 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 338
Joined Sep 2011
     
Feb 26, 2012 20:01 |  #3

This is interesting. Both of these lenses are on my short list well sort of. I may go for the Sigma 17-50 instead of the 17-55. What is the Sigma 17-50 not doing for you that you expect the 17-55 to be able to deliver?

Looking at your lens collection, I see a collection that had to be bought on total impulse. It doesn't look to me like you thought about any thing for long term planning. You plan to go full frame yet you bought 4 crop only lenses: 10-20, 17-50, 30, and 60/2.8. You have both a 24-105 and a 24-70. You have both a 17-40 and a 17-50. Do you shoot professionally that you need that redundancy in lenses?

If you dont need redundant lenses for business reasons and if you sold off all of the crop only lenses and bought the 5D2 now, the 50/1.4 replaces the 30/1.4. The 10-20 is replaced by the 17-40. The 17-50 is redundant. You don't need both the 24-105 and 24-70 so sell one. Then buy the 135L and a 100 non L macro.


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bob_r
Goldmember
2,415 posts
Gallery: 23 photos
Likes: 569
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Cordova, TN
     
Feb 26, 2012 21:26 |  #4

Have you considered buying a 5D classic? Your "stock photography" shots are mostly landscapes and a 5Dc would fit nicely with the lenses you already own since you don't seem to shoot sports or birds. I bought a very nice one recently for around $900 and see a lot of them listed for less than a 17-55IS lens would cost. The 17-55IS is an excellent lens and I use mine a lot, but considering the equipment you already own and what you shoot, I'd go with a 5Dc.


Canon 7D, 5D, 35L, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8, 135L, 200L, 10-22, 17-55, 70-300, 100-400L, 500D, 580EX(2).
Sigma 150 macro, 1.4X, 2X, Quantaray 2X, Kenko closeup tubes, Yongnuo YN685(3), Yongnuo YN-622C-TX. Lots of studio stuff.
** Image Editing OK **

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
marcosv
Senior Member
775 posts
Joined Oct 2009
Location: San Jose, CA
     
Feb 27, 2012 01:34 |  #5

I love my 17-55. Around the time I bought it, a friend bought the then current Sigma 17-50. My 17-55 was a lot better, starting with color and contrast (the Sigma had an annoying color cast) and overall sharpness. Although I haven't verified it myself, I understand later Sigma f/2.8s were much better.

I see you also have a 24-105. How does your 24-105 compare to your Sigma 17-50? My 17-55 performed very close to my 24-105, aside from its ability to shoot f/2.8 wide open very well.


EOS-M | 40D | 5DII | 5DIII | EF-M 22 | EF-M 18-55 | 10-22 | 17-55 | 17-40L | 24-70L mk II | 24-105L | 70-200/2.8L IS mk II| 35L | 85L II |35/2 | 40/2.8 pancake | 50/1.8 | 50/1.4 | 100/2 | Rokinon 14/2.8 | 90 EX | 270 EX II | 580 EXII | 600 EX-RT

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tylerpaulphoto
Senior Member
Avatar
319 posts
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Nor-Cal
     
Feb 27, 2012 01:37 |  #6

For sure the 135mm F/2, Its amazing, sharp and beautiful. I think the 17-40mm kills the 17-55mm.


Gear

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
KenBPhotos
Senior Member
Avatar
572 posts
Likes: 2
Joined Jan 2012
Location: Jersey City
     
Feb 27, 2012 03:45 |  #7

tylerpaulphoto wrote in post #13974052 (external link)
I think the 17-40mm kills the 17-55mm.

That's interesting. Not trying to debate you or anything, but I swear that's the first time I heard that. Almost every review I have read about the 17-55mm says it beats the 17-40mm all around. The only advantage that the 17-40mm has over the 17-55mm is that it comes with a lens hood and it's got a red ring. This is based on what I have read in reviews only though. I have never used the 17-40mm, but I do own the 17-55mm and I love it.




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bob_r
Goldmember
2,415 posts
Gallery: 23 photos
Likes: 569
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Cordova, TN
     
Feb 27, 2012 08:20 |  #8

KenBPhotos wrote in post #13974494 (external link)
That's interesting. Not trying to debate you or anything, but I swear that's the first time I heard that. Almost every review I have read about the 17-55mm says it beats the 17-40mm all around. The only advantage that the 17-40mm has over the 17-55mm is that it comes with a lens hood and it's got a red ring. This is based on what I have read in reviews only though. I have never used the 17-40mm, but I do own the 17-55mm and I love it.

He may have based his response on the fact that the OP already owns a 17-40L, if his signature is correct. That, and the fact that he already owns a 24-105, were the reasons that I suggested a used 5D rather than the 17-55IS.


Canon 7D, 5D, 35L, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8, 135L, 200L, 10-22, 17-55, 70-300, 100-400L, 500D, 580EX(2).
Sigma 150 macro, 1.4X, 2X, Quantaray 2X, Kenko closeup tubes, Yongnuo YN685(3), Yongnuo YN-622C-TX. Lots of studio stuff.
** Image Editing OK **

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
FEChariot
Goldmember
Avatar
4,419 posts
Gallery: 13 photos
Likes: 338
Joined Sep 2011
     
Feb 27, 2012 09:14 |  #9

marcosv wrote in post #13974043 (external link)
I love my 17-55. Around the time I bought it, a friend bought the then current Sigma 17-50.

Am I missing something here? I was under the impression that Sigma only made 2 of the old 18-50/2.8's and the one current 17-50/2.8 OS. Was there another 17-50?


Canon 7D/350D, Σ17-50/2.8 OS, 18-55IS, 24-105/4 L IS, Σ30/1.4 EX, 50/1.8, C50/1.4, 55-250IS, 60/2.8, 70-200/4 L IS, 85/1.8, 100/2.8 IS L, 135/2 L 580EX II, 430EX II * 2, 270EX II.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
bob_r
Goldmember
2,415 posts
Gallery: 23 photos
Likes: 569
Joined Aug 2006
Location: Cordova, TN
     
Feb 27, 2012 10:37 |  #10

FEChariot wrote in post #13975544 (external link)
Am I missing something here? I was under the impression that Sigma only made 2 of the old 18-50/2.8's and the one current 17-50/2.8 OS. Was there another 17-50?

I believe you're correct. The only 17-50 is the current one with OS and it's supposed to be a very good lens and some prefer it over the Canon version. I had one of Sigma's older 18-50s and the Canon 17-55IS was a nice upgrade.
Maybe the OP's copy needs an adjustment.


Canon 7D, 5D, 35L, 50 f/1.4, 85 f/1.8, 135L, 200L, 10-22, 17-55, 70-300, 100-400L, 500D, 580EX(2).
Sigma 150 macro, 1.4X, 2X, Quantaray 2X, Kenko closeup tubes, Yongnuo YN685(3), Yongnuo YN-622C-TX. Lots of studio stuff.
** Image Editing OK **

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
thestone11
Goldmember
Avatar
1,203 posts
Joined May 2011
Location: Edmonton, Alberta
     
Feb 27, 2012 10:46 |  #11

Another good lens to consider....100L macro! It is a better fit for the crop, not as long as the 135L, most importantly it has IS and will do macro! It is exceptional sharp when shooting non macro object, great for portraits!


Canon 5D MK II | Fuji X100 | Canon T2i | Canon 100mm macro f/2.8 | Canon 135L f/2 | Canon 50mm f/1.2 L | 17-40mm f/4 L | 24-70mm f/2.8 L | 70-200mm f/4 L IS USM |Canon 430EX II Flash X2 | Pocketwizard TT5 & TT1

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Raymate
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,688 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 2
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Toronto. CA - Bedford. UK
     
Feb 27, 2012 18:28 |  #12

y2k_o__o wrote in post #13971687 (external link)
17-55mm and 135mm are two different lenses

17-55mm are general purpose lens on crop sensor bodies, if you are going to upgrade to 5D2 in the next year, you might as well save up for a 24-70mm f/2.8L

for 135mm, it might be too long on a crop sensor body. a 85mm f/1.8 will get you nearly the same VOF versus 135mm on full frame sensor body

I have the 85mm and the 24-70 is a future purchase, I have the sigma 24-70 anyway, but this I may sell.

Yes they are both different types but I have uses for both.


Canon: EOS 5DmkII • 50D • 40D • 350D • 100 f2.8L IS Macro • 70-200 f4L • 24-105 f4L IS • 17-40 f4L • 50 f1.4 • 60 f2.8 Macro • 85 f1.8 • 430EX • 580EX II • ST-E2
Sigma: 10-20 f4-5.6 EX DC HSM • 30 f1.4 EX DC HSM • 17-50 f2.8 EX • 24-70 f2.8 EX DG MACRO
Apple: CS3, Aperture & iPhoto. Various Manfrotto, Portaflash, Battery Grips, SanDisk & Lowepro

alamy: my stock photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Raymate
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,688 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 2
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Toronto. CA - Bedford. UK
     
Feb 27, 2012 18:33 |  #13

FEChariot wrote in post #13972224 (external link)
This is interesting. Both of these lenses are on my short list well sort of. I may go for the Sigma 17-50 instead of the 17-55. What is the Sigma 17-50 not doing for you that you expect the 17-55 to be able to deliver?

Looking at your lens collection, I see a collection that had to be bought on total impulse. It doesn't look to me like you thought about any thing for long term planning. You plan to go full frame yet you bought 4 crop only lenses: 10-20, 17-50, 30, and 60/2.8. You have both a 24-105 and a 24-70. You have both a 17-40 and a 17-50. Do you shoot professionally that you need that redundancy in lenses?

If you dont need redundant lenses for business reasons and if you sold off all of the crop only lenses and bought the 5D2 now, the 50/1.4 replaces the 30/1.4. The 10-20 is replaced by the 17-40. The 17-50 is redundant. You don't need both the 24-105 and 24-70 so sell one. Then buy the 135L and a 100 non L macro.

The sigma I have just seems a little hit and miss with the focus, sometime it hits OK and then other it miss and I need to depress the focus again to get it to lock on.

Your part right my collection is made up of lenses that are cheaper, then once I worked out what I was doing then the better glass got purchased, the only thing is I didn't sell of the older not so good once, so agree it looks a mess. Not really impulse just what I could afford at the time.

I also shot a vast range of thing I do this in my spare time for profit, I shot stock, events and the odd wedding so a large odd selection works for me.

The 24-70 sigma is going soon, I want to sell that for sure, it's not been used for over a year.

Cant afford the 5D just yet but I would keep my 50D anyway, doing wedding with two bodes is key for me.


Canon: EOS 5DmkII • 50D • 40D • 350D • 100 f2.8L IS Macro • 70-200 f4L • 24-105 f4L IS • 17-40 f4L • 50 f1.4 • 60 f2.8 Macro • 85 f1.8 • 430EX • 580EX II • ST-E2
Sigma: 10-20 f4-5.6 EX DC HSM • 30 f1.4 EX DC HSM • 17-50 f2.8 EX • 24-70 f2.8 EX DG MACRO
Apple: CS3, Aperture & iPhoto. Various Manfrotto, Portaflash, Battery Grips, SanDisk & Lowepro

alamy: my stock photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Raymate
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,688 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 2
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Toronto. CA - Bedford. UK
     
Feb 27, 2012 18:35 |  #14

bob_r wrote in post #13972865 (external link)
Have you considered buying a 5D classic? Your "stock photography" shots are mostly landscapes and a 5Dc would fit nicely with the lenses you already own since you don't seem to shoot sports or birds. I bought a very nice one recently for around $900 and see a lot of them listed for less than a 17-55IS lens would cost. The 17-55IS is an excellent lens and I use mine a lot, but considering the equipment you already own and what you shoot, I'd go with a 5Dc.

Not really but now you have said that, i'm looking into that as an option. The classic might get me into the full frame and see how I like it for a cheaper cost.


Canon: EOS 5DmkII • 50D • 40D • 350D • 100 f2.8L IS Macro • 70-200 f4L • 24-105 f4L IS • 17-40 f4L • 50 f1.4 • 60 f2.8 Macro • 85 f1.8 • 430EX • 580EX II • ST-E2
Sigma: 10-20 f4-5.6 EX DC HSM • 30 f1.4 EX DC HSM • 17-50 f2.8 EX • 24-70 f2.8 EX DG MACRO
Apple: CS3, Aperture & iPhoto. Various Manfrotto, Portaflash, Battery Grips, SanDisk & Lowepro

alamy: my stock photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Raymate
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
1,688 posts
Gallery: 2 photos
Likes: 2
Joined Oct 2005
Location: Toronto. CA - Bedford. UK
     
Feb 27, 2012 18:36 |  #15

marcosv wrote in post #13974043 (external link)
I love my 17-55. Around the time I bought it, a friend bought the then current Sigma 17-50. My 17-55 was a lot better, starting with color and contrast (the Sigma had an annoying color cast) and overall sharpness. Although I haven't verified it myself, I understand later Sigma f/2.8s were much better.

I see you also have a 24-105. How does your 24-105 compare to your Sigma 17-50? My 17-55 performed very close to my 24-105, aside from its ability to shoot f/2.8 wide open very well.

The 24-105 is far better than my Sigma, this is another reason why I want to sell the Sigma and get the Canon.


Canon: EOS 5DmkII • 50D • 40D • 350D • 100 f2.8L IS Macro • 70-200 f4L • 24-105 f4L IS • 17-40 f4L • 50 f1.4 • 60 f2.8 Macro • 85 f1.8 • 430EX • 580EX II • ST-E2
Sigma: 10-20 f4-5.6 EX DC HSM • 30 f1.4 EX DC HSM • 17-50 f2.8 EX • 24-70 f2.8 EX DG MACRO
Apple: CS3, Aperture & iPhoto. Various Manfrotto, Portaflash, Battery Grips, SanDisk & Lowepro

alamy: my stock photography (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

4,402 views & 0 likes for this thread
Canon 17-55 2.8 IS or 135 L
FORUMS Canon Cameras, Lenses & Accessories Canon EF and EF-S Lenses 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is farzaneamiri
738 guests, 426 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 6430, that happened on Dec 03, 2017

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.